Template talk:Did you know/Beep (video game)

Beep (video game)[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle}

... that in some places in the video game Beep, players must stack dead enemies in order to advance?

Reviewed: Colas Group

Created by Steeley (talk), MuZemike (talk). Nominated by MuZemike (talk) at 03:33, 1 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A robot's body is not a carcass (at least not in the sense it is being used here); you could move further away from the source ("You even have to pile up the carcasses of your enemies occasionally") and be more precise at the same time. Article length, age, neutrality and prose are all OK. I can't comment on the quality of the sources, but the article text is quite free with the interpretation of the reviewers' comments. The second citation seems to be mislabelled and makes it appear that the Gameolith information comes from user submitted comments. No copyvio, plagiarism or close paraphrasing. Yomangani ^talk 01:19, 2 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I switched out that 2nd source ([1]), as I wasn't aware it changed there. As far as the hook is concerned, would substituting "dead enemies' parts" be more accurate (even though both sources specifically say "carcasses" because both reviewers referred to that in a purely fictional sense). –MuZemike 01:32, 2 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"stack dead enemies" would be fine (presumably they don't have to be dissembled first?). The reference is now correct, but I still don't see any support for the Gameolith information except tangentially in user-submitted comments on that page. Yomangani ^talk 10:20, 2 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I've changed the hook and removed the one part of the sentence. –MuZemike 14:30, 2 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If there are no complaints about the sources then this is ready to go (see my earlier comment for checking off the checklist). Yomangani ^talk 17:42, 2 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]